just watch it!

This movie was so-so. It had it's moments, but wasn't the greatest.

The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

A clunky actioner with a handful of cool moments.

I've recently seen both the PBS and this version, in that order. Personally, I didn't fall in love with either one. I know there are a ton of you who are fans of the PBS version, but I would suggest that its innovation (a for-TV produced cereberal Sci-fi drama 30 years ago) made a bigger crater than the actual production itself.That said, the PBS version was better in all respects save the visuals. And even then, the A&E version *still* seems like a poor-man's sci-fi film as it tries to use futuristic-like but unmodified outdoor buildings and scenery. The costumes were pretty well done though.Sadly, though, to me both films are either too abstract for me or logically complete. Maybe that's the problem with a plotline where you give a character transcendent, unlimited, unexplainable powers. I mean, realize I'm a huge Philip Dick fan, and enjoy thought-provoking, open-ended endings. But both the A&E and PBS versions leave me with that incomplete, unsatisfied feeling.

I thought this was a well made re-make of the 1980 PBS special, which starred Bruce Davison, not Craig Wasson as another reviewer mistakenly noted. (You might remember Bruce Davison as Senator Kelly form X-Men) the real fun I noticed was the Six degrees of separation aspect that Kevin Conway who played Dr. Haber in the 1980 version starred in a movie in 1991 called Rambling Rose with Lukas Haas who would end up playing Orr in this re-make. But I digress, The most exciting thing about this film was it's ability to prove that Lisa Bonet actually CAN act. Seriously, this is a cerebral Sci-Fi movie and a very watchable one at that. I thought Haas was a mismatch for the part but he was able to pull it off.

The book and previous film aside.. this is just plain dreadful. It's slow, tired, wooden with nothing of real interest cropping up anywhere in the film. I'm sorry to say that I watched all of it - but I was in continual hope that there was going to be something better happen any second.The premise seemed interesting, it's just a shame that what was such a good idea is closer to having nails pulled when watched. There's just no reason for anyone to feel anything for the characters, there's nothing there to give someone chance to identify with them. All in all it presents itself as a very sterile film, with each seprate scene seeming so forced as to jar the nerves. The hero of the piece, if you can call him that, just mopes around looking miserable and inefectual, and all in all it just bites. There's no real reason for anyone to want the characters to succeed or fail.. and in general there's not a lot of interest in the whole film. There are no scenes that are just good to look at, no memorable pieces of dialouge or memerable characters... fairly pointless all around in fact.Avoid.

let me preface by saying ive seen the 1980 version, and ive read the book.no movie will ever be exactly like the book it originates from. so why compare. its a rare occasion that an author gets behind the camera (kudos to clive barker) which means that the director gets dibs on interperitation. and books, like music, like visual art, are open to interperitation, every one takes what they want from them. i put this in the realm of american psycho, solaris, and dune. complex novels, different screen visions. when directors take on novels, they bring out what they want, and can, in the time they have.that said, i think haas did an excellent job. the whole concept behind the story has plenty to grab from. haas chose the elements he wanted to excentuate and illustrate and did so admirably. im not saying its a perfect film. i thought the penny character was totally overdone. and while i would find myself taking issues with some of the inconsistencies, i decided to except them on grounds that its the nature of this world. each waking presents a new reality. so i have no ground to argue the nitpicky stuff. i thought lukas haas was an excellent george orr, but had difficulty pairing him with lisa bonet, thus making thier relationship less believable.all in all worth seeing as a fan of speculative fiction. i would someday like to see a longer version that has a chance to dig a little deeper into the bits that matter more. making the less relevant bits less obtrusive.